Talk:Bird-of-prey
I feel this is more of disambiguation page than a ship class page, and as such the as yet unwritten individual ship class pages linked to on this page should be the ones with the Romulan or Klingon class categorisations and listing in the Romulan and Klingon Fleet templates. --8of5 20:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC) :So noted. And when someone writes those separate pages, the template links will be updated. But until then, better they link here than to nothing. --Emperorkalan 01:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC) capitalization OK, so I'm not sure this needs to be -- as with other ship types we go with battle cruiser rather than Battle Cruiser. -- Captain MKB 15:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC) :I think Bird-of-Prey and Warbird are a bit special, they seem more than just a classification like battle cruiser. MA also use the capitalised version. --8of5 15:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC) ::I'm not sure I agree, especially since non-canon actually has a ship type called Bird of Prey-class -- meaning one is a specific proper name, and this one is more general. -- Captain MKB 15:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC) :::Well under that principle you could argue the same for the USS Galaxy and the Galaxy-class. I see the Bird-of-Prey a bit like the D7-class, lots of classes that are also the singular D7, or Bird-of-Prey. :::And message to other contributors: I'm sure Mike and I's debates, and any other two sided issues, could be solved much quicker if you sometimes bothered to make your opinions known as well... --8of5 03:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC) ::::Yeah, then more of use will be dancing around in circles not coming to any definite decisions and disagreeing with each other. Sometimes you need to step back and wait before you jump in. I had some questions about what Mike was doing, but decided to wait and see, and let him complete the project he was working on. Sometimes arguing during the middle of a project is disheartening, and makes you wonder why you bothered. --Dr. John Smith 04:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC) :I'll not get involved or step back when it's something I don't feel is that important. But if I do think so I'm not going to let it slip down out of recent edits and be forgotten about. You can be defeatist and see things as nothing other than arguing if you like. I'd rather try and find solutions, compromises and agreements to get things sorted then and there. --8of5 14:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC) :Though just to note, in this particular case I moved it back to Bird-of-Prey because I found the page in the wrong place and thought to fix it. I didn't even realise Mike had moved it until he spoke up. Anyway, do you have any feeling on whether it should be capitalised or not Doc? --8of5 14:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC) ::I'm not being defeatist, I'm just saying that stepping back and viewing the whole picture is better sometimes. And I like solutions, agreements, and compromises to, but it would be nice if others made compromises to. --Dr. John Smith 14:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC) :::I don't know if that was directed at me, but I make compromises to your's, Mike's and everyone else's suggestions all the time. --8of5 14:33, 5 September 2007 (UTC) ::::True, I apologize for that last remark it did come over as rather harsh. With regards to moving this page, I agree that there should by lines between the words, but capitalized or not, I'm not overly fussed as one version will redirect to the other anyway. With regards to my comments about waiting and seeing, I was referring to the edits that were made to the Klingon bird-of-prey page, following Mike's addition of the table. --Dr. John Smith 22:25, 5 September 2007 (UTC) ::::And as for berating other members about not bothering to voice their views and opinion, maybe they didn't have any, like me. What's the point on coming on to a talk page in a middle of discussion and stating "I ain't bovvered", doesn't exactly add much does it. And also, I don't always sit back and allow things to pass when it comes to an anonymous user adding uncited and unwikified articles, as I'm, usually, the only one who bothers to clean the article up and cite them. However, when it comes to changes made by an established user like Mike, I wait and see the finished result, before I wade in, unless its a major change. And with any major change, I would expect that Mike or anyone else would start a discussion before carrying it out. --Dr. John Smith 22:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC) Well this is a collaborative project and we are not telepathic, if one user makes an edit that doesn't mark the page as theirs, so they should not take offence if someone comes along and edits it after to try and improve it further. Whilst it might have been a bit of a bumpy ride, the edits and discussion Mike and I engaged in have resulted in the Klingon Bird-of-Prey page coming out much improved; Using Mike's table and the text description I felt necessary. I meant to encourage rather than berate. Indeed someone saying "I don't care" is useless, but there are a good number of pretty active contributors around here now, more than two must have opinions, and a third opinion is all that's required to tip the scales to one side and prevent continuous stale mates. --8of5 11:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)